|
Bulls**t doesn't change anything (political thread)... (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Stassi |
| Whatever happened to the good old days, where we elected the candidate with the most merit, not the ones who dump the most millions into parades. |
|
|
| jonnypmo |
| I can't vote for anyone to lead the country that cries over a stressful campaign. Let alone more than once. |
|
|
| zachias31 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Eco
That's my point though... When a huge huge huge fraction of his votes in the Senate are neither NO nor YES, but "PRESENT" (the cop-out), we really don't know what judgment he has. In one debate, he told Edwards that he made a wrong decision about one vote that they were all involved in and Edwards said, "Yes, I was wrong... but I made a stand... I didn't vote 'present' like you, staying away from a 'no' or 'yes' for personal gain".... To think that there's a politician out there (on the potential presidential level) who doesn't structure his/her entire career for personal gain, and eventual shoe-iness to the White House, once again, very naive... They're both made moves as Senators strictly for furthering their career, it's not a one-way street, once again. |
Obama has 54 more "present" votes than Clinton does (about 38% vs. 25%) so again, I don't see that the divide is that big.
In many instances, not voting is done to prevent taking a stand on something you'll have to defend later and is a total cop out. Obama's "present" vote on the Iran bills (basically stating that Iran is dangerous and we've gotta watch those dudes, that some saw as a ramp up to war) is a good example. McCain and Clinton voted for it, so Obama's stand was better than theirs in my opinion, but he was too scared of the backlash to vote no. That was cowardice for sure.
But there are other completely defensible reasons.
* If you support a bill but not all the particulars, if it includes provisions you don't agree with, a "present" vote sends the message that you're not wholly against it, and with some retooling, would vote for it.
* Ridiculously stupid bills that have no material effect and waste everyone's time.
Fantastic example --> Cornyn Amdt. No. 2934; "To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces."
A senate bill to respond to moveon.org's "General Betrayus" ad??? Come ON people... |
|
|
| DJ Eco |
| quote: | Originally posted by Stassi
Whatever happened to the good old days, where we elected the candidate with the most merit, not the ones who dump the most millions into parades. |
TRUE!
| quote: | Originally posted by Stasis
"Why Obama Matters" by Andrew Sullivan
Please read.
Obama is the better, smarter candidate. He "rebrands" America. As an American currently living abroad--it matters. |
I read a good 2 and a half pages of it and I can't for the life of me get past the fact that Andrew Sullivan is just another blogger.... It's someone's opinion, just like us, and he just happens to be one of the known most vocal Obama fanboys... There's many of them, as there are for Clinton, that's the problem with blogs, and for the most part I try to stay away from them, and only follow REAL news, not some opinion-heavy crap some former-reporter is telling me I should believe... The first list of negatives is a very very very big one, and Sullivan's overeagerness to see past it because he thinks Obama is some revolutionary figure, it's just another excited fanboy who wants to think that electing him is some massive and revolutionary step for this country... You mentioned you live overseas, and I read many overseas newspapers/websites (not in entirety, but I brush through them when I have a chance two or three times a week) from, China, Italy, France, and a few British, and a good majority of them contain articles that more or less can't, under any circumstances, understand how stupid the Americans are to not put a Clinton back into the White House.... For the record, France made a similar decision and voted in the dashing young and inspirationally-speaking Sarkozy, and many of them admit they got sucked in, cos he's not doing ....
Anyway, anything further we say is speculation, we won't know anything until election and a year into their presidency... Let's hope for the best; I'll vote for Obama if he wins the candidacy, but I'll be holding my breath and it's not a vote of confidence, just one to get a Democrat in the office, and not McCain. |
|
|
| DJ Eco |
| quote: | Originally posted by chimera66
this was intesting to read
uncle joe was no great speaker, you have him confused with lenin |
Yeah, you're right! And I knew that too, dammit haha... |
|
|
| Hassassin |
Without going into too much of a rant...
Obama: no experience, no policy, paid for by Wall Street ( and others ), horrible voting record, running on slogans and color of skin
Clinton: experience... which indicates that she is a terrible choice for president, family name... which indicates that she is a terrible choice for president, paid for by a list of corporations and lobbies too long to name, PATHETIC voting record, running on name and gender
McCain: if you desire this country to go in a downward spiral into the depths of hell as quick as possible, vote for him... just because he has some medals does not mean he knows at all what he is talking about
All of those 3 candidates have done nothing but pander to the sheep of this country... the poor, innocent, mainstream news watching fools who think they can understand the crux of a person's political experience though 1 NYTIMES or FoxNews headline. They are the choices for those who don't not 'have the time'(a.k.a lazy, selfish, middle class corporate slaves) to research what these candidates are really about... and more importantly what our domestic & foreign policy is doing to ourselves & the rest of this world.
The ONLY candidates who stand for any type of REAL STAUNCH CHANGE would be:
Ron Paul: The most EDUCATED man in Washington. He knows exactly how our foreign policy has failed us, why we were attacked on 9/11, and how to fix the situation. His voting record proves that he is the most intelligent & honest person on that House floor. Never voted to raise his own salary, gives some of his own salary back, has never voted to increase executive powers, has never voted to go to or fund any of our recent illegal wars. He understands the unconstitutional nature of our income tax. I could go on & on... but he is THE MOST QUALIFIED candidate for change. Sure, some of his domestic policies seem a bit odd. Everyone calls HIM the radical.
(and you also had individuals like Dennis Kucinich & Mike Gravel... but with the way our media loves to spin your heads around... HAH)
Unfortunately, we live in a country where the majority of the population has become RADICALLY ignorant to anything and everything around them. Their minds are numbed by the sound & taste of their own personal problems. Bi-weekly paychecks, desperate hopes to catch a piece of the American Dream, SuperBowl craziness, moronic devotion to parties(both democrat & republican) who work for & are payed by the SAME evil geniuses.
When will people realize that they are being taken for a ride? Our government continues to rape us of our money, our pride, our power, and our souls just so a few lucky white individuals get to make enough to buy that 5th yacht they always wanted.
Education BEFORE democracy.
Fascism and farcical republics have always thrived on the notion of the unintelligent. And unfortunately, the USA is a dictator's wet dream.
sigh
when will Americans open their eyes... :( |
|
|
| DOOMBOT |
All the candidates are jerkoffs.
/thread |
|
|
| DJ Eco |
| Good rundown, and as much as people think I'm a Clinton fanboy, my views are pretty much the same as yours... It's just a decision between who's bad and who's worse. |
|
|
| DJ Eco |
| quote: | Originally posted by Stasis
"Why Obama Matters" by Andrew Sullivan
Please read. :D
Obama is the better, smarter candidate. He "rebrands" America. As an American currently living abroad--it matters. |
Decided to make it to the 3rd page, and it's just ridiculous!!!!
| quote: | What does he offer? First and foremost: his face. Think of it as the most effective potential re-branding of the United States since Reagan. Such a re-branding is not trivial—it’s central to an effective war strategy. The war on Islamist terror, after all, is two-pronged: a function of both hard power and soft power. We have seen the potential of hard power in removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. We have also seen its inherent weaknesses in Iraq, and its profound limitations in winning a long war against radical Islam. The next president has to create a sophisticated and supple blend of soft and hard power to isolate the enemy, to fight where necessary, but also to create an ideological template that works to the West’s advantage over the long haul. There is simply no other candidate with the potential of Obama to do this. Which is where his face comes in.
Consider this hypothetical. It’s November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man—Barack Hussein Obama—is the new face of America. In one simple image, America’s soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama’s face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can. |
This isn't a public relations campaign, this is our country!!! The Clinton administration was one of the closest administrations to coming up with peace in the Middle East... They love him over there, and YES, I am admitting that Bill will be very much part of Hillary's success... To think that seeing a face on TV is going to make the difference is just naive, and it's views like that that scare me to hell!!
Look, we rebranded in 2000.... President Bush was paid for, supported, propped up, and catapulted into office by rich, fat, white men with money.... Why won't people open their eyes and see the same thing happening to Obama???? Yes, it's true for Hillary too but too often people put him on this level where he's untouchable, he's uncorruptible... The catapult that put Bush into power is the same that's putting him up there too!!! John Kerry is making his damn policies, for god sakes, where's the change????? It makes me nervous to think that 90% of his supporters don't see this reality... |
|
|
| Hassassin |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Eco
Decided to make it to the 3rd page, and it's just ridiculous!!!!
This isn't a public relations campaign, this is our country!!! The Clinton administration was one of the closest administrations to coming up with peace in the Middle East... They love him over there, and YES, I am admitting that Bill will be very much part of Hillary's success... To think that seeing a face on TV is going to make the difference is just naive, and it's views like that that scare me to hell!!
Look, we rebranded in 2000.... President Bush was paid for, supported, propped up, and catapulted into office by rich, fat, white men with money.... Why won't people open their eyes and see the same thing happening to Obama???? Yes, it's true for Hillary too but too often people put him on this level where he's untouchable, he's uncorruptible... The catapult that put Bush into power is the same that's putting him up there too!!! John Kerry is making his damn policies, for god sakes, where's the change????? It makes me nervous to think that 90% of his supporters don't see this reality... |
Its always a relief to see that familiar bright spark of intelligence. When most people learn the true nature of the American political system, (and all sociological, economic, cultural, and religious phenomenon for that matter), they become completely disenfranchised with the system... or they end up going to the 'lesser of evils' voting type... for example
In 2000, Bush was a HORRIBLE candidate... but he was the best if you think Jesus, guns, a 6-pack, and lack of education go together well.
Al Gore was the 'Democrat', but what did he really stand for... no concrete policies or ethics or real change (sounds familiar right?)
Ralph Nader was the most intelligent and informed person up there, yet everyone spun it around and said that he stole votes from Gore???!?!
What kind of nonsense is that? You THREW AWAY your votes to a candidate who was built like a robot by ivy league schools & multi-national corporate money.
Such a headache this is... :mad: |
|
|
| kingchinc |
| I rank Hillary's forced crying fiasco up there with Giuliani's "coincidental" phone call. (whipped) |
|
|
|
|
